Jail bond issue defeated
Voters rejected a plan Tuesday to issue up to $65 million in bonds to pay for a new Lancaster County jail.
But that won’t derail plans to build a 664-bed jail at Southwest 40th and West O streets, say county commissioners who for months have pledged to move forward no matter the outcome.
It will, however, mean the county will select another financing plan, one that won’t require voter approval — and one that won’t be as advantageous to property taxpayers, they said.
With all precincts reporting late Tuesday, nearly 54 percent of the more than 40,000 votes cast said no to the bond issue, according to the unofficial results.
The results were disappointing but not surprising, said board Chairman Bob Workman, who led the effort to put the measure on the ballot.
Jails are a difficult issue to explain to voters, he said. And it’s even more complicated when many wrongly believed they were voting for or against the jail.
He had expected voters to reject the issue, but he doesn’t regret offering a financing plan with the least annual impact on property taxes.
“It was our fiduciary responsibility to put this on the ballot,” he said.
Besides the ability to finance the repayment over 26 years, the plan could have meant slightly lower interest rates and wouldn’t require the county to carry municipal bond insurance, he said.
The ballot language was confusing and the board faced the challenge of not being legally able to campaign, said Commissioner Deb Schorr.
In February, Schorr voted against putting the issue on the ballot because she felt it was misleading to taxpayers when the board was going to proceed with the jail project anyway.
Ray Stevens joined her, though objecting on the basis the board didn’t have a firm project cost or a way to educate voters.
The board has said it will spend no more than $65 million on the project.
County leaders now face multiple options, although none requires voter approval.
The board has at least one other long-term financing option in having the Public Building Commission issue bonds on the county’s behalf. The commission would then sign a long-term lease with the county and the city.
Stevens said he has concerns about how realistic that option is, considering the board doesn’t have the legal advice as to whether it could use it. It also has the added uncertainties of whether the commission and city officials would go along with it.
The County Board also can opt to issue the bonds itself, though it would be limited to a 10-year repayment. That would mean sharper property tax spikes over that decade, though less interest paid over the long run.
Commissioner Larry Hudkins, who was somewhat pleased that 46 percent of voters understood what was at stake, said the board will need to move swiftly to take advantage of the best bond rates.
County leaders say the jail is needed to replace an overcrowded jail at 10th and J streets and a minimum-security complex in Air Park, and to eliminate the costly task of housing inmates outside the county.
Architects expect to have the new jail’s design completed later this year. Construction could begin as early as next year.
Reach Jean Ortiz at 473-7107 or jortiz@journalstar.com.
But that won’t derail plans to build a 664-bed jail at Southwest 40th and West O streets, say county commissioners who for months have pledged to move forward no matter the outcome.
It will, however, mean the county will select another financing plan, one that won’t require voter approval — and one that won’t be as advantageous to property taxpayers, they said.
With all precincts reporting late Tuesday, nearly 54 percent of the more than 40,000 votes cast said no to the bond issue, according to the unofficial results.
The results were disappointing but not surprising, said board Chairman Bob Workman, who led the effort to put the measure on the ballot.
Jails are a difficult issue to explain to voters, he said. And it’s even more complicated when many wrongly believed they were voting for or against the jail.
He had expected voters to reject the issue, but he doesn’t regret offering a financing plan with the least annual impact on property taxes.
“It was our fiduciary responsibility to put this on the ballot,” he said.
Besides the ability to finance the repayment over 26 years, the plan could have meant slightly lower interest rates and wouldn’t require the county to carry municipal bond insurance, he said.
The ballot language was confusing and the board faced the challenge of not being legally able to campaign, said Commissioner Deb Schorr.
In February, Schorr voted against putting the issue on the ballot because she felt it was misleading to taxpayers when the board was going to proceed with the jail project anyway.
Ray Stevens joined her, though objecting on the basis the board didn’t have a firm project cost or a way to educate voters.
The board has said it will spend no more than $65 million on the project.
County leaders now face multiple options, although none requires voter approval.
The board has at least one other long-term financing option in having the Public Building Commission issue bonds on the county’s behalf. The commission would then sign a long-term lease with the county and the city.
Stevens said he has concerns about how realistic that option is, considering the board doesn’t have the legal advice as to whether it could use it. It also has the added uncertainties of whether the commission and city officials would go along with it.
The County Board also can opt to issue the bonds itself, though it would be limited to a 10-year repayment. That would mean sharper property tax spikes over that decade, though less interest paid over the long run.
Commissioner Larry Hudkins, who was somewhat pleased that 46 percent of voters understood what was at stake, said the board will need to move swiftly to take advantage of the best bond rates.
County leaders say the jail is needed to replace an overcrowded jail at 10th and J streets and a minimum-security complex in Air Park, and to eliminate the costly task of housing inmates outside the county.
Architects expect to have the new jail’s design completed later this year. Construction could begin as early as next year.
Reach Jean Ortiz at 473-7107 or jortiz@journalstar.com.
Copyright © 2002-2008 Lincoln Journal Star. All rights reserved.